MOOKAMMAL Vs. MURUGESWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainants case is that the 1st complainant is the wife of deceased Jeyaraj and the second complainant is the son. On the instructions of the 2nd opposite party, the 1st opposite party opened a S.B. Account with the Indian Overseas Bank. The deceased was a member of the Provident Fund. Since the complainants did not get the provident fund amount, family pension and family benefit, they made inquiries at the 2nd opposite party who said that they have not received the claim form and that the 1st opposite party has not forwarded the claim form. Therefore, the complainant issued notice to the opposite parties. No steps were taken by the opposite parties. Thus, there is deficiency in service.

(2.) ACCORDING to the 1st opposite party, the complainant did not hand over any claim forms or other certificates. He has further stated that he is prepared to forward the same as and when it is received.

(3.) THE 2nd opposite party contended that the complainant never met the 2nd opposite party. They came to know of the death of Jeyaraj only on receipt of notice to which they have sent a reply. If and when, it is properly submitted, the 2nd opposite party will take necessary action. The opposite party is not in a position to get a claim form. Hence, there is no deficiency in service.